1. Title, director and release year?
Blue Gold
Sam Bozzo
2008
2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
This movie focuses on how we are using up our water and abusing the amount that we have. There is only 3% of the world’s supply of water is fresh water and now it is becoming a commodity, one that isn’t available to all people and is being privatized and becoming owned by corporations, which is always a bad sign for the environment and public. This movie discusses what will happen if this trend of water consumption continues, and what we can do to slow down the problem, and hopefully, eventually solve it.
3. What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
- Consumption/Cultural o We are consuming water at such a high rate, and it’s continuously increasing o We are mining groundwater at a rate 15 times faster than it can be replenished § This is causing problems like sinkholes and desertification o For some locations in the world, we just take water for granted. When we need water we just go to the sink or go buy a bottle without thinking anything of it. But for most of the world, there is no access to clean drinking water and the cultures that are using all the water up are not considering these people
- Political/Legal/Economic o Governments all over the world are privatizing water in all different countries and they’re making it more expensive to use water o Also, as a general theme of the class, corporations don’t concern themselves with the public health, they are only worried about making a profit – this is a dangerous field when talking about people’s water
- Ecological o There is a limited supply of freshwater and since we are taking so much out of the ground and are making cities and roads, it’s nearly impossible for the water to get back down into the ground § This is causing soil depletion and rain forest reduction, which is hurting both humans and animals that need these resources
4. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
- There is only 3% of the world’s supply of water that is fresh water and most of this water is polluted beyond human consumption o When they showed the picture of the Earth with the 97% of salt water, that humans/animals can’t drink without being filtered (which uses energy) and basically the whole earth was covered in blue. Then they showed what the Earth is like with fresh water, and it’s only 3%, and the earth looked like a desert, with barely any blue on it representing water. o This really showed how little water resources we had and how we need to conserve and protect this resource
- One of the world’s most polluted river borders the United States and Mexico, it’s where many of the Mexicans travel down to try and get into America. The border patrol are just following the immigrants down the river because there’s no way that they are getting in the water to get the Mexicans o They dump waste from hospitals in the river, including fetuses, human waste, needles, medical supplies – the thought of that is nauseating o It was discussed all of the diseases that are in the water, just from what is dumped in it
- It was really encouraging to see the Bolivian people fight against the privatization of water in their country o I found it especially interesting because I worked for a nuclear power plant that was built by Bechtel, and even though I knew the company, I had no idea that they were trying to privatize water. It just shows how corporations are acting in different countries and we have no idea what’s going on back in the US. o When the people flooded the streets to stop this from happening, it was amazing how the people were fighting together against their own citizens over a foreign company
5. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?
- I was not convinced when they were talking about the amount of water that it took to grow certain crops o For example it said that it took 107 liters to grow a banana. Even though this does seem high, they never gave us anything to compare it to. It would have made more of an impact if they said; it takes 107 liters to grow a banana, but when it is locally grown it only takes X amount of liters. Otherwise, these numbers mean nothing.
6. What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.?
- I would like to research more about the public and private debate o With the private option it seems like the corporations will just want to make money and lose the public’s interest o However, with a public option, governments are corrupt enough and would they have enough money to fully clean the water on taxpayers money
7. What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems?
- This film best addresses people that use water and don’t think about the implications of their use. People do simple things like leave the water on when they’re brushing their teeth and water their lawn when it’s not necessary, and don’t think about every person that does it and how that adds up in the world.
8. What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film?
The main intervention in this movie is that we need to adapt to our ecosystem, it’s never going to be the other way around. The Earth was here first and we come on it and changed it, it’s not going to change for us and start producing more water and more oil just because we need to power our man-made products. Humans, especially Americans, need to learn to live with what we have and no expect so many luxuries all the time. The movie also talks about more traditional farming practices so that the land isn’t so depleted and water is not so desperately needed. This would relieve pressure off of the farmers and allow them to produce more natural crops in a more sustainable way.
9. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
It would have been beneficial if the movie discussed more technology and new ideas to fix this problem, instead of just cutting back on our water shortage, which is necessary, but we should be preparing for alternatives.
Blue Gold
Sam Bozzo
2008
2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
This movie focuses on how we are using up our water and abusing the amount that we have. There is only 3% of the world’s supply of water is fresh water and now it is becoming a commodity, one that isn’t available to all people and is being privatized and becoming owned by corporations, which is always a bad sign for the environment and public. This movie discusses what will happen if this trend of water consumption continues, and what we can do to slow down the problem, and hopefully, eventually solve it.
3. What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
- Consumption/Cultural
o We are consuming water at such a high rate, and it’s continuously increasing
o We are mining groundwater at a rate 15 times faster than it can be replenished
§ This is causing problems like sinkholes and desertification
o For some locations in the world, we just take water for granted. When we need water we just go to the sink or go buy a bottle without thinking anything of it. But for most of the world, there is no access to clean drinking water and the cultures that are using all the water up are not considering these people
- Political/Legal/Economic
o Governments all over the world are privatizing water in all different countries and they’re making it more expensive to use water
o Also, as a general theme of the class, corporations don’t concern themselves with the public health, they are only worried about making a profit – this is a dangerous field when talking about people’s water
- Ecological
o There is a limited supply of freshwater and since we are taking so much out of the ground and are making cities and roads, it’s nearly impossible for the water to get back down into the ground
§ This is causing soil depletion and rain forest reduction, which is hurting both humans and animals that need these resources
4. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
- There is only 3% of the world’s supply of water that is fresh water and most of this water is polluted beyond human consumption
o When they showed the picture of the Earth with the 97% of salt water, that humans/animals can’t drink without being filtered (which uses energy) and basically the whole earth was covered in blue. Then they showed what the Earth is like with fresh water, and it’s only 3%, and the earth looked like a desert, with barely any blue on it representing water.
o This really showed how little water resources we had and how we need to conserve and protect this resource
- One of the world’s most polluted river borders the United States and Mexico, it’s where many of the Mexicans travel down to try and get into America. The border patrol are just following the immigrants down the river because there’s no way that they are getting in the water to get the Mexicans
o They dump waste from hospitals in the river, including fetuses, human waste, needles, medical supplies – the thought of that is nauseating
o It was discussed all of the diseases that are in the water, just from what is dumped in it
- It was really encouraging to see the Bolivian people fight against the privatization of water in their country
o I found it especially interesting because I worked for a nuclear power plant that was built by Bechtel, and even though I knew the company, I had no idea that they were trying to privatize water. It just shows how corporations are acting in different countries and we have no idea what’s going on back in the US.
o When the people flooded the streets to stop this from happening, it was amazing how the people were fighting together against their own citizens over a foreign company
5. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?
- I was not convinced when they were talking about the amount of water that it took to grow certain crops
o For example it said that it took 107 liters to grow a banana. Even though this does seem high, they never gave us anything to compare it to. It would have made more of an impact if they said; it takes 107 liters to grow a banana, but when it is locally grown it only takes X amount of liters. Otherwise, these numbers mean nothing.
6. What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.?
- I would like to research more about the public and private debate
o With the private option it seems like the corporations will just want to make money and lose the public’s interest
o However, with a public option, governments are corrupt enough and would they have enough money to fully clean the water on taxpayers money
7. What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems?
- This film best addresses people that use water and don’t think about the implications of their use. People do simple things like leave the water on when they’re brushing their teeth and water their lawn when it’s not necessary, and don’t think about every person that does it and how that adds up in the world.
8. What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film?
The main intervention in this movie is that we need to adapt to our ecosystem, it’s never going to be the other way around. The Earth was here first and we come on it and changed it, it’s not going to change for us and start producing more water and more oil just because we need to power our man-made products. Humans, especially Americans, need to learn to live with what we have and no expect so many luxuries all the time. The movie also talks about more traditional farming practices so that the land isn’t so depleted and water is not so desperately needed. This would relieve pressure off of the farmers and allow them to produce more natural crops in a more sustainable way.
9. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
It would have been beneficial if the movie discussed more technology and new ideas to fix this problem, instead of just cutting back on our water shortage, which is necessary, but we should be preparing for alternatives.